Takahito Wakamiya1, Shimpei Yamashita2, Kazuro Kikkawa2, Yasuo Kohjimoto2, Yasutaka Noda3, Tetsuo Sonomura3, Isao Hara2. 1. Department of Urology, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama, 641-8509, Japan. wakataka14@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Department of Urology, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama, 641-8509, Japan. 3. Department of Radiology, Wakayama Medical University, 811-1 Kimiidera, Wakayama, 641-8509, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To understand differences in quality of life outcomes between cases with forward planning and cases with inverse planning, we examine patients undergoing high-dose rate brachytherapy combined with external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS: We prospectively identified 283 patients with localized prostate cancer and divided them into forward planning and inverse planning groups. We extracted data on doses to the prostate, rectum and urethra that could potentially affect quality of life. We also evaluated quality of life using the Japanese version of Medical Outcome Study 8-Items Short Form Health Survey and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite at pre-treatment and at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after treatment. Wilcoxon signed rank test and Bonferroni correction were used to analyze the irradiation dose and any change in quality of life. RESULTS: Doses to the prostate and rectum were not significantly different between the two groups. Notably, however, doses to the urethra were significantly lower in the inverse planning group than in the forward planning group. Patients in the forward planning group had significantly poorer physical component summary scores at 3 months according to survey results. In Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite, patients in the forward planning group had statistically significant poorer urinary, bowel and sexual scores than those in the inverse planning group. Quality of life related to decline in sexual function was significantly reduced in the inverse planning group. CONCLUSIONS: Inverse planning in high-dose rate brachytherapy could significantly improve quality of life of patients with prostate cancer.
OBJECTIVES: To understand differences in quality of life outcomes between cases with forward planning and cases with inverse planning, we examine patients undergoing high-dose rate brachytherapy combined with external beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. METHODS: We prospectively identified 283 patients with localized prostate cancer and divided them into forward planning and inverse planning groups. We extracted data on doses to the prostate, rectum and urethra that could potentially affect quality of life. We also evaluated quality of life using the Japanese version of Medical Outcome Study 8-Items Short Form Health Survey and Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite at pre-treatment and at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after treatment. Wilcoxon signed rank test and Bonferroni correction were used to analyze the irradiation dose and any change in quality of life. RESULTS: Doses to the prostate and rectum were not significantly different between the two groups. Notably, however, doses to the urethra were significantly lower in the inverse planning group than in the forward planning group. Patients in the forward planning group had significantly poorer physical component summary scores at 3 months according to survey results. In Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite, patients in the forward planning group had statistically significant poorer urinary, bowel and sexual scores than those in the inverse planning group. Quality of life related to decline in sexual function was significantly reduced in the inverse planning group. CONCLUSIONS: Inverse planning in high-dose rate brachytherapy could significantly improve quality of life of patients with prostate cancer.
Entities:
Keywords:
External beam radiotherapy; High-dose rate brachytherapy; Inverse planning; Prostate cancer; Quality of life
Authors: Anna M Dinkla; Rob van der Laarse; Emmie Kaljouw; Bradley R Pieters; Kees Koedooder; Niek van Wieringen; Arjan Bel Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2014-10-22 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Ruud C Wortel; Luca Incrocci; Floris J Pos; Joos V Lebesque; Marnix G Witte; Uulke A van der Heide; Marcel van Herk; Wilma D Heemsbergen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-03-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Nicholas G Zaorsky; Scott W Keith; Talha Shaikh; Paul L Nguyen; Eric M Horwitz; Adam P Dicker; Robert B Den Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Martin G Sanda; Rodney L Dunn; Jeff Michalski; Howard M Sandler; Laurel Northouse; Larry Hembroff; Xihong Lin; Thomas K Greenfield; Mark S Litwin; Christopher S Saigal; Arul Mahadevan; Eric Klein; Adam Kibel; Louis L Pisters; Deborah Kuban; Irving Kaplan; David Wood; Jay Ciezki; Nikhil Shah; John T Wei Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-03-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Dietmar Georg; Christian Kirisits; Martin Hillbrand; Johannes Dimopoulos; Richard Pötter Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-05-19 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Arunan Sujenthiran; Julie Nossiter; Susan C Charman; Matthew Parry; Prokar Dasgupta; Jan van der Meulen; Paul J Cathcart; Noel W Clarke; Heather Payne; Ajay Aggarwal Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: David P Smith; Madeleine T King; Sam Egger; Martin P Berry; Phillip D Stricker; Paul Cozzi; Jeanette Ward; Dianne L O'Connell; Bruce K Armstrong Journal: BMJ Date: 2009-11-27